Greta Thunberg calls on world leaders to listen to young activists

[thaibeachlovers]

19 hours ago, Nigel Garvie said:

The way this reads gave me a laugh. Mankind has been searching for the perpetual motion machine for centuries, and here someone on Thai VF actually believes that it exists! OK maybe that's not quite what you meant.

There is no 100% efficient machine anywhere, check out the laws of entropy.

 

There are wave machines that convert motion to electricity, they test them in the Pentland Firth, they are getting more efficient all the time. Using wave power to pump water uphill which then comes down again strikes me as remarkably inefficient.

 

The ultimate answer to most of our power consumption may be nuclear fusion, but we are still left with the problem that if you use energy it is simply transferred somewhere else. Energy is neither created nor destroyed, it just gets converted into a different form. Someone with a real science qualification is welcome to correct me here. Your ability to read websites like " thetruthaboutscience.com" does not qualify you.

Methinks thou doth protest too much.

Not my idea for a start.

Nothing to do with perpetual motion.

Wave machines move water uphill, water flows downhill to power generators, generators produce electricity. The energy used to move the water uphill is nothing to do with energy gained from water flowing downhill.

 

BTW, wave to electricity machines only work when there are waves, just like windmills only work when there is wind. Using a storage reservoir allows the hydro to work even when there are no waves- not efficient?

[thaibeachlovers]

16 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

She only 17 and speak good English for a Swedish. I will not fault her for not knowing as much as you on the vastly complex processes driving the earth’s environment and biosphere. I too don’t have that intellectual ability to understand such complexity. But she carry a powerful message and has huge like-minded followers. They do pray for her to win the nominated Noble Peace Prize after being named as the most influential woman in Sweden. 

What has complaining that we have stolen her dreams got to do with bringing peace to the planet?

[Eric Loh]

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

What has complaining that we have stolen her dreams got to do with bringing peace to the planet?

The same reasons Al Gore won in 2007 and Norman Borlaug in 1970 for his Green Revolution 

[ThaiBunny]

22 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

LOL. I could go out and ask 100 people what they think of Thunberg and the usual response would be "who"?

All this climate alarmism is being driven in schools by climate alarmist teachers, but away from school children and the political bubble, IMO few are even interested, or going to change their lifestyle, no matter how the children nag.

Saint Greta's movement is solely of interest to middle-class white kids. It's actually got three prongs - climate change, veganism (she bullied her parents into becoming vegans), and recycling/anti-consumerism. The last is all about not buying things willy-nilly, but only as and when absolutely needed. I told all my family members they wouldn't be getting any Christmas presents on that basis if I heard an approving sound from them about the Saint

[Nigel Garvie]

15 hours ago, RickBradford said:

Those "nutters" include prominent authors such as Naomi Klein, who wrote a New York Times best-seller entitled "This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate", so it's hardly a fringe view. Klein may be unhinged, but she's popular.

Yes Naomi Klein was at her peak with "Shock Doctrine". She has since taken what is fairly widely seem as a bit of a looney turn in her views on Climate. She has sold a lot of books it is true, whether that is feeding of her previous reputation I would not care to speculate. 

15 hours ago, rabas said:

Very few people do! But I would rather follow knowledgeable people with significant maturity and experience over Greta. Old white men scientists and professors come to mind.  Most important are people who are not heavily invested in the outcome. There have been a few good videos of such people posted in earlier threads.

 

I doubt many prefer under-aged, poorly educated Noble Peace Prize laureates.

 

Why "Old white men scientists and professors" (Presumably professors of Science). Scientists have passed their peak by their mid 30s at the latest. Old ones, (Whatever the colour of their skin) are way passed their peak, and the professor tag is generally a reward for long tenure rather that achievement. So called maturity is overvalued, often it just means a struggle between failing ability, and unjustified self assurance.

"Most important are people who are not heavily invested in the outcome". Good point, that rules out all the people whose "Research" is funded by the fossil fuel industry.

14 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

FYI you don’t need any level of education qualification to be the chosen as NPP laureate. Malala Yousafzai was 17 when she was NPP laureate. 

Of course, and the award has been utterly corrupted when it was awarded to the war criminal Kissinger. Children are still getting their legs blown off on the Plain of Jars.

[Orton Rd]

Love to see grumpy Greta go to China, a major polluter to wag her little finger at them. They would just laugh at her, which would be the right reaction to a dumb kid with no real arguments, but lots of emotion and a few mental problems.

[ThaiBunny]

4 minutes ago, Nigel Garvie said:

She has sold a lot of books it is true,

So has Paul Ehrlich, and look how totally discredited he and his ideas are today

[Eric Loh]

1 hour ago, Orton Rd said:

Love to see grumpy Greta go to China, a major polluter to wag her little finger at them. They would just laugh at her, which would be the right reaction to a dumb kid with no real arguments, but lots of emotion and a few mental problems.

Why China who is committed to targets set up in the Paris Accord. Go to US, second largest polluter in the world and where majority has concern for the majority except Trump and Trumpsters. Let her wag her finger at the biggest climate denier. Trump will go mental if she goes to US. 

 

[ThaiBunny]

2 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Go to US, second largest polluter in the world and where majority has concern for the majority except Trump and Trumpsters. Let her wag her finger at the biggest climate denier. Trump will go mental if she goes to US.

Again, you mean? After her first trip to address the UN in New York when Trump walked right past her?

[RickBradford]

15 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Why China who is committed to targets set up in the Paris Accord.

That's because the targets set up in the Paris Agreement (not Accord) were set up by China itself, and allows it to increase its CO2 emissions all the way up to 2030.

 

These targets have been panned by critics as largely worthless, a problem given it is the world's biggest CO2 emitter. Or, in your terminology, "largest polluter".

 

Climate Action Tracker noted:

 

Quote

China’s 2030 Paris Agreement Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) is however rated “Highly Insufficient”. The country's current domestic policies however are headed in a slightly better direction towards an "Insufficient" rating, indicating a significant potential for the country to increase its NDC level of ambition.

So there is every reason for Greta to go there. However, her handlers aren't fools, and know full well that they would get the horse laugh from the Chinese authorities if they tried to present this troubled schoolgirl as the voice of "wisdom".

[Eric Loh]

14 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

That's because the targets set up in the Paris Agreement (not Accord) were set up by China itself, and allows it to increase its CO2 emissions all the way up to 2030.

 

These targets have been panned by critics as largely worthless, a problem given it is the world's biggest CO2 emitter. Or, in your terminology, "largest polluter".

 

Climate Action Tracker noted:

 

So there is every reason for Greta to go there. However, her handlers aren't fools, and know full well that they would get the horse laugh from the Chinese authorities if they tried to present this troubled schoolgirl as the voice of "wisdom".

Countries set up their commitments based on their ability to achieve those targets and to be agreed. China committed to peak its carbon emissions around 2030 and to achieve 20% non-fossil energy as a proportion of primary energy supply by 2030. So far China has falling short of achieving those targets and the gaps measured by their targets are being discussed with action plans to negate the gaps. Credit to the agreement. US has no target now. 

[RickBradford]

^^

As the US is the major economy that has had the greatest success in reducing CO2 emissions, why would it bother with "targets"?

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2017/10/24/yes-the-u-s-leads-all-countries-in-reducing-carbon-emissions/#154441fb3535

[Eric Loh]

1 hour ago, RickBradford said:

^^

As the US is the major economy that has had the greatest success in reducing CO2 emissions, why would it bother with "targets"?

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2017/10/24/yes-the-u-s-leads-all-countries-in-reducing-carbon-emissions/#154441fb3535

The Washington Post fact-checked this claim and rated it “Three Pinocchios,” which means they rate the claim mostly false. They further wrote that Pruitt’s usage of data appeared to be a “deliberate effort to mislead the public.”
 

Don’t you read your own link. 

[rabas]

4 hours ago, Nigel Garvie said:

Why "Old white men scientists and professors" (Presumably professors of Science). Scientists have passed their peak by their mid 30s at the latest. Old ones, (Whatever the colour of their skin) are way passed their peak, and the professor tag is generally a reward for long tenure rather that achievement. So called maturity is overvalued, often it just means a struggle between failing ability, and unjustified self assurance.

You are confusing individual achievements in one's personal area of research with mastering broad areas of science and technology on multiple levels. The latter requires as much experience as possible, sometimes a lifetime's worth. E.g., one would never consider a fresh graduate or youthful researcher to redirect a nation's nuclear energy research, or head the WHO to save the world.

 

Even if a young narrowly focused scientist could master everything about Climate, Greta can't.

 

BTW, dedicated scientists often publish more in their earlier years then move on to bigger more important achievements as they mature like founding institutions, companies, and helping to guide fields of research.  Elon Musk is 48, going strong, and will likely get us to Mars.

 

Edited January 23, 2020 by rabas

[RickBradford]

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

They further wrote that Pruitt’s usage of data appeared to be a “deliberate effort to mislead the public.”

Well, since the US Energy Information Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the World Bank agree with Forbes, perhaps you should investigate the Washington Post for its production of Pinocchios.

 

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34872

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions

[rabas]

2 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

China committed to peak its carbon emissions around 2030 and to achieve 20% non-fossil energy as a proportion of primary energy supply by 2030. So far China has falling short of achieving those targets and the gaps measured by their targets are being discussed with action plans to negate the gaps.

Can Greta help?

[Eric Loh]

50 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

Well, since the US Energy Information Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the World Bank agree with Forbes, perhaps you should investigate the Washington Post for its production of Pinocchios.

 

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34872

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions

What about some recent report. Those you linked were almost 3 years old. Those data were backward looking data from Obama’s green environment policies. 

[Eric Loh]

55 minutes ago, rabas said:

Can Greta help?

She done all she can. Perhaps a new POTUS can do more for climate change, 

[Tulak]

19 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

She done all she can. Perhaps a new POTUS can do more for climate change, 

Please don't ask "potus" - or any other leader to fix anything.

Current episode will be just a glitch in history of Gaia.

By all means, reduce (human) garbage output we manage to generate - but please no more.

Let the Earth to orbit around the Sun in peace, allow her to keep it's tilt, let our Sun shine and change it's sunspots every 11 years or so...

All the above affects our climate more than a six-pack cooling in your fridge - so please don't feel guilty about it. Go, open that fridge and have a cold one. 

[Nigel Garvie]

2 hours ago, rabas said:

You are confusing individual achievements in one's personal area of research with mastering broad areas of science and technology on multiple levels. The latter requires as much experience as possible, sometimes a lifetime's worth. E.g., one would never consider a fresh graduate or youthful researcher to redirect a nation's nuclear energy research, or head the WHO to save the world.

 

Even if a young narrowly focused scientist could master everything about Climate, Greta can't.

 

BTW, dedicated scientists often publish more in their earlier years then move on to bigger more important achievements as they mature like founding institutions, companies, and helping to guide fields of research.  Elon Musk is 48, going strong, and will likely get us to Mars.

 

I don't think you are really up to date with the way Science is done nowadays. My son (Phd particle Physics Tokyo) tells me again and again that the days when ANY individual can be "mastering broad areas of science and technology on multiple levels." have long since past, charming though the idea may be to you. There are not expected to be any more Einsteins, Planks, Diracs, Maxwells, Heinsenbergs, or for that matter Darwins, Pasteurs, or Flemings, any time soon. This is because the amount of knowledge NOW required to be competent even in ONE SMALL FIELD of Science is vast, and a lifetime of your cherished "Experience" is not going to change that. When the LHC gets another set of results from smashing protons together they are shared with many thousands of Physicists all over the world.

 

The fact that people accumulate more experience as they get older is not open to question. The idea that this somehow makes them wiser - or indeed in many cases more mature - certainly is. 

 

I'm agnostic on the topic of Greta as a person, I'm basically not interested. She has done well to help focus people on one of the biggest issues of our day, and who she is should be unimportant. Unfortunately she appears to reduce many "Old white men" (Your phrase) to pathetic apoplectic wrecks quivering with indignation. That is not really what should be our concern.

[Scott]

Troll post removed.  

 

[TheDark]

"The greatest intellectual excitement when talking with Boomers is to wonder if they drop death in the middle of sentence or they make it back to their homes."

 

- Greta Thundberg, dropping depth charges to Boomers

[TheDark]

5 hours ago, Nigel Garvie said:

I don't think you are really up to date with the way Science is done nowadays. My son (Phd particle Physics Tokyo) tells me again and again that the days when ANY individual can be "mastering broad areas of science and technology on multiple levels." have long since past, charming though the idea may be to you. There are not expected to be any more Einsteins, Planks, Diracs, Maxwells, Heinsenbergs, or for that matter Darwins, Pasteurs, or Flemings, any time soon. This is because the amount of knowledge NOW required to be competent even in ONE SMALL FIELD of Science is vast, and a lifetime of your cherished "Experience" is not going to change that. When the LHC gets another set of results from smashing protons together they are shared with many thousands of Physicists all over the world.

 

The fact that people accumulate more experience as they get older is not open to question. The idea that this somehow makes them wiser - or indeed in many cases more mature - certainly is. 

 

I'm agnostic on the topic of Greta as a person, I'm basically not interested. She has done well to help focus people on one of the biggest issues of our day, and who she is should be unimportant. Unfortunately she appears to reduce many "Old white men" (Your phrase) to pathetic apoplectic wrecks quivering with indignation. That is not really what should be our concern.

I'm so close to fully agree with all you say, but.. there is still differences. 

 

Current sciences still need leaders, who can combine various ideas, various fields of sciences to become more whole entities, than experts on their specific fields can do. 

 

Current sciences needs Oppenheimers. who are not the best minds of any specific field, but who are able to understand the larger picture and guide the groups of scientists towards it. 

 

We need Feynman's type of people, who are funny and brilliant how to explain, in simplest possible ways, how the sciences work, to the masses. 

 

In a way Greta has been very good scientists, not for her own scientific breakthroughs, but for her ability to communicate the common idea of thousands of scientists, to the millions of people. 

 

Science is a collective and co-operative community, where each part of it can feel proud (and often a bit jealous), when new ideas are discovered and published to the rest of the world. 

[Tulak]

3 hours ago, TheDark said:

I'm so close to fully agree with all you say, but.. there is still differences. 

 

Current sciences still need leaders, who can combine various ideas, various fields of sciences to become more whole entities, than experts on their specific fields can do. 

 

Current sciences needs Oppenheimers. who are not the best minds of any specific field, but who are able to understand the larger picture and guide the groups of scientists towards it. 

 

We need Feynman's type of people, who are funny and brilliant how to explain, in simplest possible ways, how the sciences work, to the masses. 

 

In a way Greta has been very good scientists, not for her own scientific breakthroughs, but for her ability to communicate the common idea of thousands of scientists, to the millions of people. 

 

Science is a collective and co-operative community, where each part of it can feel proud (and often a bit jealous), when new ideas are discovered and published to the rest of the world. 

Science is good, but only when it is totally free open and unbiased science.

Free from any kind of political pressure and interference.

 

During the 1970's, imminent cooling of the Earth culminating in a period of extensive glaciation was big news.

This is not so long ago - and still it was the same science using basically the same scientific methods as it uses today. So what is going on?

 

The last point the usual "97 % scientists agreeing" on something doesn't mean they are right.

Just think of Galileo. 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

13 hours ago, rabas said:

Elon Musk is 48, going strong, and will likely get us to Mars.

Given his opinion of people that are heroes ( cave diver that rescued kids in Thailand ), I hope he is on the first voyage there.

[thaibeachlovers]

10 hours ago, Nigel Garvie said:

The fact that people accumulate more experience as they get older is not open to question. The idea that this somehow makes them wiser - or indeed in many cases more mature - certainly is. 

Older people know more about what happened in the past than youths do, which is certainly relevant. It's why I, though not being a scientist, can call "rising sea levels in the Pacific a threat to humanity" a hoax, as I remember when sea levels on NZ's Pacific coast were more or less at the same level as now. A young person has no past benchmarks to judge the authenticity of pronouncements by and is more likely to agree with the propaganda than us oldies, IMO.

[BritManToo]

11 hours ago, Nigel Garvie said:

There are not expected to be any more Einsteins, Planks, Diracs, Maxwells, Heinsenbergs, or for that matter Darwins, Pasteurs, or Flemings, any time soon. This is because the amount of knowledge NOW required to be competent even in ONE SMALL FIELD of Science is vast, and a lifetime of your cherished "Experience" is not going to change that. When the LHC gets another set of results from smashing protons together they are shared with many thousands of Physicists all over the world.

I'm calling BS on this, all original science is done by 1 man, groups and committees never accomplish anything new or original.

[mokwit]

7 hours ago, TheDark said:

"The greatest intellectual excitement when talking with Boomers is to wonder if they drop death in the middle of sentence or they make it back to their homes."

 

- Greta Thundberg, dropping depth charges to Boomers

She really said that? My the arrogance from an expert on scientific research who has not even done a bachelors in it yet.

[mokwit]

3 hours ago, Tulak said:

The last point the usual "97 % scientists agreeing" on something doesn't mean they are right.

97% of scientists don't agree on it, just 97% of a carefully selected subset.

[VocalNeal]

All dentists recommend Colgate!